Why are we so reluctant to blood debutantes in important matches?

[Texan]

Just take a look at the English side. They blood not one, not two, but three debutantes in one Test match, an important match against SA when the series is even and everything is at stake. 

 

And the result - Two of the debutantes contribute significantly to the win: Wesley with his second innings 50 and Roland-Jones with 8 wickets in the match. 

 

So, question is: why are we always reluctant to play new players in important matches even when we know the experienced players are not performing. I even hear that a lot on ICF. It is always assumed that:

 

Out of form experienced player >>> In form debutante

 

No guts, no glory. 

 

Debate. 

[rahulrulezz]

TBH we are a very conservative country and dont like to go out of the box.. We like to take a safe path... I know so many super aggressive batsman who were playing attacking brand of cricket in limited overs IPL but were forced to go to domestics Ranjis and prove it there. thats where they lost their natural game and came back with a confused technique over natural talent... 

[Ankit_sharma03]

Wrote about ourselves being conservative in a large way after CT final and this point was a part of it

http://www.indiancricketfans.com/forums/topic/102054-in-the-larger-picture-we-lost-because-of-our-conservative-and-safe-mindset/

[Tibarn]

One thing the English has going for them is County Cricket. They have immense belief that County produces quality players and that performing in County is a suitable reference for success in international cricket. 

 

I think we have something similar in the IPL, but that is for T20s. I don't think many of our players get into the team because of their Ranji performances. We see a lot of our players first having to work their ways through ODIs/T20s before we will even consider them for Tests. 

[Pollack]

This is a cricket forum where fans follow cricket passionately and yet even on this forum fans are conservative only. One will keep on hearing XYZ needs to prove first or he cannot replace old horses in the team. One hears a lot of nonsense like is newcomer as good as experienced player straightaway. Indians are largely hero worshippers and they just not know to let it go. Hero worshiping culture is one of the reasons for not trying bold moves. 

[renjith]

Forget about important matches. We don't give chance to young players even in low profile matches/series.

Edited July 31, 2017 by renjith

[Texan]

3 hours ago, Tibarn said:

One thing the English has going for them is County Cricket. They have immense belief that County produces quality players and that performing in County is a suitable reference for success in international cricket. 

 

I think we have something similar in the IPL, but that is for T20s. I don't think many of our players get into the team because of their Ranji performances. We see a lot of our players first having to work their ways through ODIs/T20s before we will even consider them for Tests. 

Our Ranji Trophy does also produce some good cricketers who have shown immediate results. Ganguly got consecutive hundreds in first 2 Tests away from home. Dravid started his career well too. Thank goodness we got rid of Manjrekar before that tour. We have been successful in the past too when getting new players into the Test team. 

 

More recently - Rahane was benched for 16 Test matches in the squad before he made his debut and except for his first match, he largely started off playing away tours in tough conditions. But he got good scores in all away tours. 

 

We don't even have the guts to blood new players who have been part of A tours and done well in different countries. As I said, an experienced player in woeful form is considered superior to a new player in top form. 

 

 

 

[Tibarn]

26 minutes ago, Texan said:

Our Ranji Trophy does also produce some good cricketers who have shown immediate results. Ganguly got consecutive hundreds in first 2 Tests away from home. Dravid started his career well too. Thank goodness we got rid of Manjrekar before that tour. We have been successful in the past too when getting new players into the Test team. 

 

More recently - Rahane was benched for 16 Test matches in the squad before he made his debut and except for his first match, he largely started off playing away tours in tough conditions. But he got good scores in all away tours. 

 

We don't even have the guts to blood new players who have been part of A tours and done well in different countries. As I said, an experienced player in woeful form is considered superior to a new player in top form. 

 

 

 

Oh, I agree with you that we have less guts when it comes to selection policy, especially when compared to England.

 

I was only saying that for some reason our selectors and maybe our captains feel a lot of our players have to "prove it" in limited overs before getting a test cap, even if they have great Ranji numbers.

 

New players in the squad like Thakur never get a game, even against a relatively weak team like West Indies, and some long time Ranji stalwarts, like Pankaj Singh have to wait years before they finally get debuts. Other players like Yuvraj constantly get brought back into the team during every ICC cup, even when they haven't performed domestically. Our whole selection policy is a mess.